On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 6:57 PM, Luiz Capitulino <lcapitul...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 09:33:15 +0300 > Blue Swirl <blauwir...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 1:40 AM, Luiz Capitulino <lcapitul...@redhat.com> >> wrote: >> > This series introduces the inject-nmi command for QMP, which sends an >> > NMI to _all_ guest's CPUs. >> > >> > Also note that this series changes the human monitor nmi command to use >> > the QMP implementation, which means that it now has a DIFFERENT behavior. >> > Please, check patch 3/3 for details. >> >> As discussed earlier, please change the QMP version for future >> expandability so that instead of single command 'inject-nmi', 'inject' >> takes parameter 'nmi'. HMP command 'nmi' can remain for now, but >> 'inject' should be added. > > I'm not sure I agree with this, because we risky overloading 'inject' the > same way we did with the 'change' command. > > What's 'inject' supposed to do in the future?
Inject other IRQs, for example inject nmi could become an alias to something like inject /apic@fee00000:l1int which would be a shorthand for raise /apic@fee00000:l1int lower /apic@fee00000:l1int I think we only need a registration framework for IRQs and other signals.
